On the go and no time to finish that story right now? Your News is the place for you to save content to read later from any device. Register with us and content you save will appear here so you can access them to read later.

The RSA has staunchly defended the quality of its food after it was called into question in a "tongue-in-cheek" advertisement by a trendy Auckland bar.

The Ponsonby Social Club has been accused of making "untrue and defamatory statements", after an ad campaign claiming the food provided at Returned Serviceman's Association (RSA) branches was less than desirable.

"The Ponsonby Social Club, kinda like the RSA without the chewy meat and over boiled veges ... Ponsonby Social Club, your kind of local," the ad read.

The campaign, which ended its run six weeks ago, prompted a complaint from a listener to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), saying it was highly offensive and defamatory.

The bar responded saying it was surprised by the complaint, because it intended the ad to be "completely tongue-in-cheek" and didn't expect anyone to be offended.

RSA chief executive David Moger said the advert was banking on an old perception of what RSAs were like, but things had drastically changed.

"If you're ever in different RSAs around Auckland and around the country, you'll find that the food offered is now very different from that old perception that they seem to be trying to trade on."

He cited examples of the Birkenhead and Titirangi RSAs, the latter now flaunting a rooftop garden and a woodfire pizza oven. "The food there is building up such a great reputation in the area that they're attracting a lot of the new customers in there for new members as a result."

Mr Moger said a number of branches around Auckland had complained to him about the ad, but they had chosen not to take any official action. "Fundamentally, we're about promoting our message, and for me, good advertising is about promoting your own products and services and not trying to knock back somebody else's."

He said a lot of people within the organisation were upset by the ad, and felt it was "inappropriate" as well as untrue.